ITPS.L vs. ERNS.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ITPS.L) and iShares £ Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF (ERNS.L).
ITPS.L and ERNS.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. ITPS.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD. It was launched on Dec 8, 2006. ERNS.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Markit iBoxx GBP Liquid Investment Grade Ultrashort Index. It was launched on Nov 16, 2013. Both ITPS.L and ERNS.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: ITPS.L or ERNS.L.
Performance
ITPS.L vs. ERNS.L - Performance Comparison
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ITPS.L achieves a 3.23% return, which is significantly lower than ERNS.L's 4.75% return. Over the past 10 years, ITPS.L has outperformed ERNS.L with an annualized return of 4.35%, while ERNS.L has yielded a comparatively lower 1.58% annualized return.
ITPS.L
3.23%
1.33%
2.95%
3.90%
2.32%
4.35%
ERNS.L
4.75%
0.36%
2.51%
5.53%
2.40%
1.58%
Key characteristics
| ITPS.L | ERNS.L | |
|---|---|---|
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.67 | 8.36 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.09 | 17.79 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.12 | 3.64 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.21 | 48.58 |
| Martin Ratio | 3.03 | 226.78 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.45% | 0.02% |
| Daily Std Dev | 6.53% | 0.67% |
| Max Drawdown | -37.27% | -1.51% |
| Current Drawdown | -16.29% | 0.00% |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
ITPS.L vs. ERNS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ITPS.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is higher than ERNS.L's 0.09% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Correlation
The correlation between ITPS.L and ERNS.L is 0.25, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
ITPS.L vs. ERNS.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ITPS.L) and iShares £ Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF (ERNS.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Dividends
ITPS.L vs. ERNS.L - Dividend Comparison
ITPS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ERNS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.25%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITPS.L iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ERNS.L iShares £ Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF | 5.25% | 4.54% | 1.14% | 0.28% | 0.75% | 1.04% | 0.74% | 0.52% | 0.81% | 0.72% | 0.55% | 0.06% |
Drawdowns
ITPS.L vs. ERNS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ITPS.L drawdown since its inception was -37.27%, which is greater than ERNS.L's maximum drawdown of -1.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITPS.L and ERNS.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
ITPS.L vs. ERNS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares $ TIPS UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ITPS.L) is 1.91%, while iShares £ Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF (ERNS.L) has a volatility of 2.42%. This indicates that ITPS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ERNS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.